The weekend before the paper was due, I made myself a schedule. I planned to write about two pages a day, and then use Wednesday for editing and creating the bibliography. Somehow, I actually stuck to this schedule. I did not want to procrastinate on my first big college paper!
When I finally finished the paper and diagram, I have to admit that I was very proud. A few weeks earlier, when the paper was assigned, I was confused and didn't think I would actually be able to create a paper in time, let alone one that I liked. But this paper taught me that if I work hard and stay organized, I can accomplish something I orginally found confusing and difficult.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Saturday, October 31, 2009
The Writing Begins
I started writing the research paper today. There’s nothing like staring at a blank sheet of paper, with the cursor blinking, knowing you have written about one word out of five thousand. But once I typed out the first few sentences, my writing started flowing. I finished the whole “overview” section of the paper today, and I have a plan for each day of the week. My goal is to write a page or two a day, and then edit the paper Wednesday night; I don’t want to procrastinate on my first real college paper!
Saturday, October 24, 2009
The Research Begins
A few days ago, I began reading my journal articles. I started with a review article since I thought it would be the simplest and easiest to understand. I soon realized such a task would be much more difficult than I anticipated. I was not familiar with the terminology of osteoporosis—or really any of the medical lingo—and couldn’t really understand how any of the treatments worked. I knew that an understanding of my topic was essential to creating the machine analysis diagram, so I decided to backtrack and learn the basics.
I went to the Biomedical library the next day and checked out the five least-scary books I could find. Paging through the books and looking at the diagrams really helped me understand osteoporosis better. I began taking notes in Microsoft Word, so I can keep my thoughts organized. I feel like I am little bit behind now, because I still have not read all six journal articles; studying the books took me longer than expected. I hope to catch up on all my research this weekend, and then start my machine analysis diagram on Monday.
I went to the Biomedical library the next day and checked out the five least-scary books I could find. Paging through the books and looking at the diagrams really helped me understand osteoporosis better. I began taking notes in Microsoft Word, so I can keep my thoughts organized. I feel like I am little bit behind now, because I still have not read all six journal articles; studying the books took me longer than expected. I hope to catch up on all my research this weekend, and then start my machine analysis diagram on Monday.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
A Topic Change
I decided today to change my research topic. I had initially planned to research a specific facet of Hodgkin’s Lymphoma: the onset of the disease. I wanted to compare the way Hodgkin’s takes over the body to a machine, but as I began my research, I realized such a feat would be much more difficult than I anticipated. Hodgkin’s lymphoma affects people in different ways, not to mention I was struggling to relate the disease to a machine. I was worried my paper would lack the machine focus if I wrote about lymphoma, so I decided to brainstorm for topics again.
I considered hemochromatosis, Cushing’s Disease, and Celiac Disease, but eventually decided upon osteoporosis. I plan to focus on the treatment of osteoporosis—how drugs can “rebuild” bone—and found this focus much more adaptable to the machine comparison than Hodgkin’s. I then found six journal articles (this process took a very long time) and stowed them away. I plan to start reading everything tomorrow.
I considered hemochromatosis, Cushing’s Disease, and Celiac Disease, but eventually decided upon osteoporosis. I plan to focus on the treatment of osteoporosis—how drugs can “rebuild” bone—and found this focus much more adaptable to the machine comparison than Hodgkin’s. I then found six journal articles (this process took a very long time) and stowed them away. I plan to start reading everything tomorrow.
Friday, October 9, 2009
The Boy who cannot Sleep
I began my brainstorming for a research paper topic in a strange way. I knew I wanted to explore a subject that really interests me, or else the paper would be dull and painful, so I typed into Google “the weirdest medical conditions.” I was not disappointed: pages of websites with names such as “Twenty Mysterious Medical Syndromes” and “Ten People with Unbelievable Medical Conditions” popped up, filled with outrageous stories about rare medical conditions. I learned about a girl who is allergic to water, a man who cannot feel pain, a four-year old boy who can’t ever sleep, and many other bizarre, live-altering conditions (1, 2).
Although these outlandish medical conditions are very interesting, to say the least, I am not sure if I want to write a full research paper on one. First off, I’m not sure how much information I will be able to find about such rare diseases. Also, I would rather learn about something a bit more relevant to society. So I began tossing around other ideas: I considered stem cell research, glaucoma (a friend recently told me that some patients with this condition are prescribed marijuana, which has become a controversial issue), and the causes of cancer. As of now, I think I am leaning towards the cancer angle. My friend had Hodgkin’s Lymphoma when we were in high school, so maybe I will explore that specific type of cancer. I’ve always wanted to understand the condition better, and the research paper seems like a perfect opportunity to do so.
Sources:
1. http://www.oddee.com/item_96473.aspx
2. http://www.medicalassistants.info/blog/20-strange-and-mysterious-medical-syndromes
Although these outlandish medical conditions are very interesting, to say the least, I am not sure if I want to write a full research paper on one. First off, I’m not sure how much information I will be able to find about such rare diseases. Also, I would rather learn about something a bit more relevant to society. So I began tossing around other ideas: I considered stem cell research, glaucoma (a friend recently told me that some patients with this condition are prescribed marijuana, which has become a controversial issue), and the causes of cancer. As of now, I think I am leaning towards the cancer angle. My friend had Hodgkin’s Lymphoma when we were in high school, so maybe I will explore that specific type of cancer. I’ve always wanted to understand the condition better, and the research paper seems like a perfect opportunity to do so.
Sources:
1. http://www.oddee.com/item_96473.aspx
2. http://www.medicalassistants.info/blog/20-strange-and-mysterious-medical-syndromes
Sunday, October 4, 2009
The Thing with the Flyers...
Sometimes I walk without really seeing. I trek from class to class with my eyes closed (figuratively), always talking to a friend, listening to my iPod, or—my personal favorite—simply zoning out. Many times, I find I don’t have time to slow down and really look at things; this fast-paced lifestyle is something I have always wanted to change.
So when I read about this week’s Bioengineering assignment, I was most excited for the actual search for a structure. A chance to wander around and explore new parts of campus sounded like a nice change of pace, as far as homework assignments go. I set aside a block of time for my search; camera in hand, I headed down Locust Walk with a mission. As I stopped to examine different structures, I almost felt a bit out of place. Most people were hurrying from one place to another (normally, I would fall in that category!), but there I was, simply standing and staring.
I eventually decided on a structure and snapped a few pictures. What to name my structure presented a bit of a challenge, but after asking the advice of a few suitemates, I decided on the “Circular Bulletin Board.” The name expresses the function: the “circular bulletin board” is a giant cylinder with flyers and notices plastered along its sides. Long, vertical strips of wood form the exterior, but most of the wood is hidden from view the overlapping papers.
The size of the circular bulletin board can be examined in several different ways. The first method that comes to mind is a measurement of meters, either through circumference or volume. The radius of the structure is about .4 meters, and the height is 1.8 meters, so the circumference and volume of the cylinder-shaped structure can easily be calculated through the formulas C=2πr (2.5 meters) and V=πr^2 h (.9 square meters). The volume probably isn’t as useful a value as the circumference—circumference is easier to understand and visualize, at least for me. The cylindrical shape of the bulletin board reminds me of a water bottle. Although the two are completely different sizes, they share several characteristics, such as a direct correlation between shape and function. While the bulletin board’s figure allows maximum advertisement of its flyers (people can see them from every direction, unlike a normal, flat board), a water bottle’s shape holds water. For both objects, the cylindrical shape best suits the function: can you imagine drinking water from a triangularly shaped glass?
Totaling the number of wooden boards is second way to describe size. There are a total of fifty boards, each 5 centimeters in diameter. Multiplying the number of boards by the width of each gives the circumference again, this time with a smaller unit (250 centimeters). Looking at the structure’s individual pieces may generate the same number, but I began to see the structure in a different way: instead of one large cylinder, I saw long, rectangular boards. Strangely enough, these wooden strips reminded me of popsicle sticks. Back in the day of arts and crafts, I would painstakingly glue popsicle sticks around a little cup, forming a pencil holder. The popsicle sticks alone were nothing more than little strips of wood, but once I glued them together, I had something. The same rules apply to the bulletin board: each piece of wood is useless by itself, but when they are all connected, a structure is formed.
My third way of examining the size of the bulletin board is a bit more abstract and a lot less reliable. I counted the number of papers on the cylinder: fifty-eight, if I didn’t miss any. Assuming that each sheet is 8.5 by 11 inches, the surface area covered by sheets is 5423 square inches. I then guessed that flyers cover three-fourths of the cylinder. That being said, the total surface area of the cylinder ends up being roughly 7230 square inches. If I do the actual calculations, using the formula for surface area of a cylinder, I see that the real surface area is 7200 square inches. Calculating the surface area from the flyers, rather than the shape of the whole, offers an interesting perspective. I can see how “efficient” the structure is; only a certain percentage of the cylinder actually performs its function of holding papers. Looking at the dirty, run-down flyers strangely reminds me of the walls of an art museum. Like the bulletin board, an art museum has a specific function: to display something. However, every inch of the wall cannot be covered with paintings; people cannot concentrate on such an overwhelming amount of material. Although filling the entire wall of an art museum, or the whole side of a bulletin board, theoretically creates 100% space efficiency, the numbers are misleading; they do not include the “human factor.” People cannot process so many different flyers or paintings at once. In this case, less is more.
Searching for a structure gave me a reason to really look at things. What is this made of? How does it work? Is it useful? Such basic questions don’t always have straightforward answers. I learned to approach a structure in many different ways: I examined different length scales, functions, and comparisons, for each factor builds a larger understanding of the structure as a whole. Such an approach can be used for many engineering problems. Just as I observed the cylinder over several different size scales, I should consider many angles of a problem. I should also never forget to really see; there’s a lot of “circular bulletin boards” out there, waiting to be noticed.
So when I read about this week’s Bioengineering assignment, I was most excited for the actual search for a structure. A chance to wander around and explore new parts of campus sounded like a nice change of pace, as far as homework assignments go. I set aside a block of time for my search; camera in hand, I headed down Locust Walk with a mission. As I stopped to examine different structures, I almost felt a bit out of place. Most people were hurrying from one place to another (normally, I would fall in that category!), but there I was, simply standing and staring.
I eventually decided on a structure and snapped a few pictures. What to name my structure presented a bit of a challenge, but after asking the advice of a few suitemates, I decided on the “Circular Bulletin Board.” The name expresses the function: the “circular bulletin board” is a giant cylinder with flyers and notices plastered along its sides. Long, vertical strips of wood form the exterior, but most of the wood is hidden from view the overlapping papers.
The size of the circular bulletin board can be examined in several different ways. The first method that comes to mind is a measurement of meters, either through circumference or volume. The radius of the structure is about .4 meters, and the height is 1.8 meters, so the circumference and volume of the cylinder-shaped structure can easily be calculated through the formulas C=2πr (2.5 meters) and V=πr^2 h (.9 square meters). The volume probably isn’t as useful a value as the circumference—circumference is easier to understand and visualize, at least for me. The cylindrical shape of the bulletin board reminds me of a water bottle. Although the two are completely different sizes, they share several characteristics, such as a direct correlation between shape and function. While the bulletin board’s figure allows maximum advertisement of its flyers (people can see them from every direction, unlike a normal, flat board), a water bottle’s shape holds water. For both objects, the cylindrical shape best suits the function: can you imagine drinking water from a triangularly shaped glass?
Totaling the number of wooden boards is second way to describe size. There are a total of fifty boards, each 5 centimeters in diameter. Multiplying the number of boards by the width of each gives the circumference again, this time with a smaller unit (250 centimeters). Looking at the structure’s individual pieces may generate the same number, but I began to see the structure in a different way: instead of one large cylinder, I saw long, rectangular boards. Strangely enough, these wooden strips reminded me of popsicle sticks. Back in the day of arts and crafts, I would painstakingly glue popsicle sticks around a little cup, forming a pencil holder. The popsicle sticks alone were nothing more than little strips of wood, but once I glued them together, I had something. The same rules apply to the bulletin board: each piece of wood is useless by itself, but when they are all connected, a structure is formed.
My third way of examining the size of the bulletin board is a bit more abstract and a lot less reliable. I counted the number of papers on the cylinder: fifty-eight, if I didn’t miss any. Assuming that each sheet is 8.5 by 11 inches, the surface area covered by sheets is 5423 square inches. I then guessed that flyers cover three-fourths of the cylinder. That being said, the total surface area of the cylinder ends up being roughly 7230 square inches. If I do the actual calculations, using the formula for surface area of a cylinder, I see that the real surface area is 7200 square inches. Calculating the surface area from the flyers, rather than the shape of the whole, offers an interesting perspective. I can see how “efficient” the structure is; only a certain percentage of the cylinder actually performs its function of holding papers. Looking at the dirty, run-down flyers strangely reminds me of the walls of an art museum. Like the bulletin board, an art museum has a specific function: to display something. However, every inch of the wall cannot be covered with paintings; people cannot concentrate on such an overwhelming amount of material. Although filling the entire wall of an art museum, or the whole side of a bulletin board, theoretically creates 100% space efficiency, the numbers are misleading; they do not include the “human factor.” People cannot process so many different flyers or paintings at once. In this case, less is more.
Searching for a structure gave me a reason to really look at things. What is this made of? How does it work? Is it useful? Such basic questions don’t always have straightforward answers. I learned to approach a structure in many different ways: I examined different length scales, functions, and comparisons, for each factor builds a larger understanding of the structure as a whole. Such an approach can be used for many engineering problems. Just as I observed the cylinder over several different size scales, I should consider many angles of a problem. I should also never forget to really see; there’s a lot of “circular bulletin boards” out there, waiting to be noticed.
Monday, September 28, 2009
The Nightmare of Healthcare
Why is health care so expensive? Before today, I was clueless. I don’t mean that I didn’t know the basics: prices are climbing, debates are ensuing, people are unhappy—but I never knew the details or extent of the problem.
The United States spends twice as much as other wealthy nations on healthcare. At first, I thought this money seemed like a worthy investment, but then I learned that Americans may not be getting their money’s worth. The United States lags behind other nations (who spend less) in measures such as infant mortality and life expectancy (1). In 2000, the World Health Organization ranked United States health care as highest in cost, 37th in overall performance, and 72nd in overall level of health. There were 191 nations in the study (2). Furthermore, at least 15% of Americans are uninsured, and a considerable additional portion is “underinsured.” The Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences describes the somewhat embarrassing problem: “The United States is the only wealthy, industrialized nation that does not ensure that all citizens have coverage” (3). All in all, the total number of Americans who die each year because of lack of medical care exceeds 100,000.
How can America simultaneously reduce costs and improve the quality of healthcare? After perusing the Internet for about 30 seconds, I realized that this question does not have a simple answer. Americans seem to blame everyone and everything for the problem. Some claims are reasonable while others are outrageous, and basically nobody agrees upon a solution. Sometimes I don’t even know who to believe! The problem is multi-faceted: I guess this is a good opportunity for me to “think like an engineer.”
I soon learned that one contributor to the health care crisis is delay in seeking medical care. Uninsured Americans are more likely to postpone a visit to the doctor; but in the long run, such a delay can cause more medical problems, which tend to be more expensive to treat than ongoing issues (4). If simple office visits were more affordable and easier to schedule, such long-term conditions could be partly avoided. Perhaps patients could even meet with a nurse, rather than a doctor—could such a system save money?
Problems with care coordination also account for extra costs. About one in five doctors reported having patients retake tests because the results have been misplaced (5). Diagnostic tests tend to be very pricey; creating a more efficient system for filing results seems like a worthwhile investment. Another clerical problem results from different types of record keeping. I worked in my dad’s office over the summer—he is a physician—and saw firsthand how mixing paper and electronic records creates confusion and extra work. Implementing Electronics Medical Records (EMR) can save time and money and eliminate confusion, making patient care more seamless (6).
Sometimes disease prevention can be very cost effective. For every $1 spent in water fluoridation, $38 is saved in dental restorative treatments costs. Implementing an Arthritis Self-Help Course among 10,000 people lowers health costs by $2.5 million, while also reducing pain by 18%. Clinical smoking interventions cost about $2587 for each year of life saved—the most cost effective of all clinical health services. Similarly, a mammogram every couple years for women aged 50-69 costs about $9000 a year per life saved. All these measures reduce medical costs in the long run (7).
But I think the most interesting way to reduce healthcare costs is personalized medicine. Personalized medicine can determine someone’s predisposition to a certain disease. The cost of individualized treatments and diagnostic tests may be more expensive, but in the end, the tests may help people avoid more costly treatments (8).
So which of these measures will best help reduce health care costs? To be honest, I have no idea. I am afraid that some of the sources I used are biased. For example, one overwhelmingly conservative source places an entire argument around how the uninsured are “jacking up” emergency room prices, which ruins our health care system. Maybe there is some truth in his claim, but the argument seemed too one-sided to me. Another article I read blames healthcare prices on obesity. “One of the reasons that healthcare is so expensive is that we are fat,” the article begins (9). The website continues to discuss how obesity is “killing us.” Again, the article struck me as trying to pinpoint one specific cause of a multi-faceted problem. Everybody needs something to blame—a scapegoat— to explain away the healthcare crisis. But there is no one cause, nor is there one solution, to the problem.
Sources
1. Marian F MacDorman, Ph.D., and T.J. Mathews, M.S.. "Recent Trends in Infant Mortality in the United States" (pdf). National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control.
2. World Health Organization assess the world's health system. Press Release WHO/44 21 June 2000.
3. Insuring America's Health: Principles and Recommendations, Institute of Medicine of the National Academies of Science, 2004-01-14. Retrieved 2007-10-22.
4. Hadley, Jack, "Insurance Coverage, Medical Care Use, and Short-term Health Changes Following an Unintentional Injury or the Onset of a Chronic Condition", JAMA, March 14, 2007; 297: 1073 - 1084.
5. California HealthCare Foundation, [4] "Uncoordinated Care: A Survey of Physician and Patient Experience"], Harris Interactive. 2007. Retrieved March 20, 2008.
6. http://knowledge.emory.edu/article.cfm?articleid=1263
7. http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/06/best-ways-to-lower-healthcare-costs-by.html
8. Lesko L (2007) "Personalized medicine: elusive dream or imminent reality?" Clin Pharmacol Ther 81 (6) pp. 807-16.
9. http://www.whereistheoutrage.net/wordpress/2009/09/19/why-is-healthcare-so-expensive/comment-page-1/
The United States spends twice as much as other wealthy nations on healthcare. At first, I thought this money seemed like a worthy investment, but then I learned that Americans may not be getting their money’s worth. The United States lags behind other nations (who spend less) in measures such as infant mortality and life expectancy (1). In 2000, the World Health Organization ranked United States health care as highest in cost, 37th in overall performance, and 72nd in overall level of health. There were 191 nations in the study (2). Furthermore, at least 15% of Americans are uninsured, and a considerable additional portion is “underinsured.” The Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences describes the somewhat embarrassing problem: “The United States is the only wealthy, industrialized nation that does not ensure that all citizens have coverage” (3). All in all, the total number of Americans who die each year because of lack of medical care exceeds 100,000.
How can America simultaneously reduce costs and improve the quality of healthcare? After perusing the Internet for about 30 seconds, I realized that this question does not have a simple answer. Americans seem to blame everyone and everything for the problem. Some claims are reasonable while others are outrageous, and basically nobody agrees upon a solution. Sometimes I don’t even know who to believe! The problem is multi-faceted: I guess this is a good opportunity for me to “think like an engineer.”
I soon learned that one contributor to the health care crisis is delay in seeking medical care. Uninsured Americans are more likely to postpone a visit to the doctor; but in the long run, such a delay can cause more medical problems, which tend to be more expensive to treat than ongoing issues (4). If simple office visits were more affordable and easier to schedule, such long-term conditions could be partly avoided. Perhaps patients could even meet with a nurse, rather than a doctor—could such a system save money?
Problems with care coordination also account for extra costs. About one in five doctors reported having patients retake tests because the results have been misplaced (5). Diagnostic tests tend to be very pricey; creating a more efficient system for filing results seems like a worthwhile investment. Another clerical problem results from different types of record keeping. I worked in my dad’s office over the summer—he is a physician—and saw firsthand how mixing paper and electronic records creates confusion and extra work. Implementing Electronics Medical Records (EMR) can save time and money and eliminate confusion, making patient care more seamless (6).
Sometimes disease prevention can be very cost effective. For every $1 spent in water fluoridation, $38 is saved in dental restorative treatments costs. Implementing an Arthritis Self-Help Course among 10,000 people lowers health costs by $2.5 million, while also reducing pain by 18%. Clinical smoking interventions cost about $2587 for each year of life saved—the most cost effective of all clinical health services. Similarly, a mammogram every couple years for women aged 50-69 costs about $9000 a year per life saved. All these measures reduce medical costs in the long run (7).
But I think the most interesting way to reduce healthcare costs is personalized medicine. Personalized medicine can determine someone’s predisposition to a certain disease. The cost of individualized treatments and diagnostic tests may be more expensive, but in the end, the tests may help people avoid more costly treatments (8).
So which of these measures will best help reduce health care costs? To be honest, I have no idea. I am afraid that some of the sources I used are biased. For example, one overwhelmingly conservative source places an entire argument around how the uninsured are “jacking up” emergency room prices, which ruins our health care system. Maybe there is some truth in his claim, but the argument seemed too one-sided to me. Another article I read blames healthcare prices on obesity. “One of the reasons that healthcare is so expensive is that we are fat,” the article begins (9). The website continues to discuss how obesity is “killing us.” Again, the article struck me as trying to pinpoint one specific cause of a multi-faceted problem. Everybody needs something to blame—a scapegoat— to explain away the healthcare crisis. But there is no one cause, nor is there one solution, to the problem.
Sources
1. Marian F MacDorman, Ph.D., and T.J. Mathews, M.S.. "Recent Trends in Infant Mortality in the United States" (pdf). National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control.
2. World Health Organization assess the world's health system. Press Release WHO/44 21 June 2000.
3. Insuring America's Health: Principles and Recommendations, Institute of Medicine of the National Academies of Science, 2004-01-14. Retrieved 2007-10-22.
4. Hadley, Jack, "Insurance Coverage, Medical Care Use, and Short-term Health Changes Following an Unintentional Injury or the Onset of a Chronic Condition", JAMA, March 14, 2007; 297: 1073 - 1084.
5. California HealthCare Foundation, [4] "Uncoordinated Care: A Survey of Physician and Patient Experience"], Harris Interactive. 2007. Retrieved March 20, 2008.
6. http://knowledge.emory.edu/article.cfm?articleid=1263
7. http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/06/best-ways-to-lower-healthcare-costs-by.html
8. Lesko L (2007) "Personalized medicine: elusive dream or imminent reality?" Clin Pharmacol Ther 81 (6) pp. 807-16.
9. http://www.whereistheoutrage.net/wordpress/2009/09/19/why-is-healthcare-so-expensive/comment-page-1/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)